(19-12-2012 10:37 AM)Logica Humano Wrote: So is it immoral for the woman who is being raped to fight back? Or how about when a father is defending his family from a criminal? Or when a soldier protects his nation from invaders? According to you it is. You have yet to demonstrate the true meaning of subjective morality. "True" morality is whatever you, with your individual perception, believe is right. I may think that an Islamic extremist is doing the wrong thing, but he believes he is doing the right thing.

The idea that there is "good" and "evil" already presupposes that there is an absolute objectivity to morality. Your position is malformed.

I said 'initiating' violence- I'd have no problem killing someone if my life was threatened by the person in question, defending yourself is completely different to initiating violence- surely you understand this?. I said this many times.

'belief' is the key word there, if your morality requires faith and belief you are probably you are doing the wrong thing. Morality is as evident as gravity- I don't 'believe' I am a good person, I am good by an objective definition since I never initiate violence on a micro or macro scale. It's not my belief, it's just a fact that I am a good person. Those that do not do as I are bad, and I have no hesitation calling those that initiate violence evil.

No one has argued that the initiation is inherently good or bad. All we have told you is that morality is subjective, and that you either deliberately ignore that fact or your brain is extremely eroded.

You are not "good" by any objective definition. Why? Because morality is subjective. You believe you are good by your subjective belief of good.

Quote:mo·ral·i·ty
/məˈralətē/
Noun
Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
Behavior as it is affected by the observation of these principles.

(19-12-2012 10:53 AM)FZUMedia Wrote: I said 'initiating' violence- I'd have no problem killing someone if my life was threatened by the person in question, defending yourself is completely different to initiating violence- surely you understand this?. I said this many times.

'belief' is the key word there, if your morality requires faith and belief you are probably you are doing the wrong thing. Morality is as evident as gravity- I don't 'believe' I am a good person, I am good by an objective definition since I never initiate violence on a micro or macro scale. It's not my belief, it's just a fact that I am a good person. Those that do not do as I are bad, and I have no hesitation calling those that initiate violence evil.

No one has argued that the initiation is inherently good or bad. All we have told you is that morality is subjective, and that you either deliberately ignore that fact or your brain is extremely eroded.

You are not "good" by any objective definition. Why? Because morality is subjective. You believe you are good by your subjective belief of good.

Quote:mo·ral·i·ty
/məˈralətē/
Noun
Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
Behavior as it is affected by the observation of these principles.

Nothing in the above definition implies objectivity.

No, being peaceful is best for anyone and everyone in the long term- there's no evidence that proves otherwise.

We live in a society were an elected president gives the order to kill millions of innocent civilians in the middle east yet cries over 20 kids being killed in his own country, and you are surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary? I'm sure the definition of God was different 1000 years ago too.

There are no compromises and subjectivity with morality, otherwise it's something else- but morality is the last thing it is.

(19-12-2012 11:36 AM)Logica Humano Wrote: No one has argued that the initiation is inherently good or bad. All we have told you is that morality is subjective, and that you either deliberately ignore that fact or your brain is extremely eroded.

You are not "good" by any objective definition. Why? Because morality is subjective. You believe you are good by your subjective belief of good.

Nothing in the above definition implies objectivity.

No, being peaceful is best for anyone and everyone in the long term- there's no evidence that proves otherwise.

We live in a society were an elected president gives the order to kill millions of innocent civilians in the middle east yet cries over 20 kids being killed in his own country, and you are surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary? I'm sure the definition of God was different 1000 years ago too.

There are no compromises and subjectivity with morality, otherwise it's something else- but morality is the last thing it is.

That is your moral conviction. Others would argue that it is the moral thing to, for instance, destroy an entire nation of people because it is in the best interest of the majority. The preservation of the collective.

I am not surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary because it is subjective.

Yes, there are. The very fact that you believe something to be "good" and I believe that it is "bad" is demonstrable proof of that.

(19-12-2012 11:56 AM)FZUMedia Wrote: No, being peaceful is best for anyone and everyone in the long term- there's no evidence that proves otherwise.

We live in a society were an elected president gives the order to kill millions of innocent civilians in the middle east yet cries over 20 kids being killed in his own country, and you are surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary? I'm sure the definition of God was different 1000 years ago too.

There are no compromises and subjectivity with morality, otherwise it's something else- but morality is the last thing it is.

That is your moral conviction. Others would argue that it is the moral thing to, for instance, destroy an entire nation of people because it is in the best interest of the majority. The preservation of the collective.

I am not surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary because it is subjective.

Yes, there are. The very fact that you believe something to be "good" and I believe that it is "bad" is demonstrable proof of that.

I don't believe it is good, it is good by definition. If you believe what I am is wrong then you are evil.

(19-12-2012 01:37 PM)Logica Humano Wrote: That is your moral conviction. Others would argue that it is the moral thing to, for instance, destroy an entire nation of people because it is in the best interest of the majority. The preservation of the collective.

I am not surprised that morality has a subjective definition in the dictionary because it is subjective.

Yes, there are. The very fact that you believe something to be "good" and I believe that it is "bad" is demonstrable proof of that.

I don't believe it is good, it is good by definition. If you believe what I am is wrong then you are evil.

No, it means he disagrees with your view. Maybe it is you who is evil.

Or, more likely, neither of you is evil - you just don't agree.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

(18-12-2012 06:43 AM)NoahsFarce Wrote: There's another video of a male lion forcing himself to ingest one of his offspring after it was killed. The lion was visibly distressed and making vocalizations during the whole process. Those vocalizations were nothing like the type you hear when they are feeding on normal prey.

Long story short, if empathy is your reason for justifying veganism/vegetarianism, you are effectively deeming all of these other species of animals immoral.

Bear in mind male lions routinely kill the offspring of other male lions when they take over a pride. I don't think morals come into nature at all; it would be more accurate to say nature is amoral rather than immoral.

You read my statement wrong. I said a Lion was consuming his own offspring that was killed by another male lion. And I never spoke of morals. Morals is a human descriptor. I was getting at apparent empathy. You see that in nature within many species. Well, what we can only describe as empathy.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.” -Neil deGrasse Tyson

(19-12-2012 11:56 AM)FZUMedia Wrote: We live in a society were an elected president gives the order to kill millions of innocent civilians in the middle east [...]

What is your source for this information?

He's actually right on this one... man, that hurt to say it...

Just Google it. The prez orders drone strikes and these strikes do kill innocent civilians in the Middle East. He also ordered the assassination of an American Citizen (albeit a known terrorist) without due process.

I'm not much into politics, but even I think that's a little twisted in he morality department. Much in the same way he pushes an anti-gun agenda yet is being protected by armed guards.

FZU, you mentioned that two people can't steal from each other at the same time...

Two pick pockets run into each other and steal the an item off one another. What's so illogical about that scenario?

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.” -Neil deGrasse Tyson